NationStates Jolt Archive

The MPAA decided to take into consideration smoking when deciding the rating for a movie. "Pervasive smoking" can lead to an R rating.

If we are going to make absurd things count in the ratings system, we should just make a new category - D, for pervasive drug use. If it also lives up to an R rating without the smoking, stick an R on the end. Now we have a ratings system that remotely lets people know what the fuck is wrong with the movie.

If you haven't noticed, that's actually been happening. If you look at the ratings box they'll give short summary for why the film got its R or PG rating.

Does anyone really bother consulting movie ratings? I know I don't...

Does anyone really bother consulting movie ratings? I know I don't...

You don't use a PG-13 rating as an indicator that a movie about a harsh subject has been wussified in order to gain wider release?

If you haven't noticed, that's actually been happening. If you look at the ratings box they'll give short summary for why the film got its R or PG rating.
"For extended boobie exposure and aggravated violence."

I stopped paying attention to movie ratings when I noticed that Jurassic Park--a movie with graphic violence and deaths--was PG-13, while The Birdcage was rated R. Curse words and the existence of gay people are, I guess, more harmful to young minds than images of bloody death. Whatev.

I stopped paying attention to movie ratings when I noticed that Jurassic Park--a movie with graphic violence and deaths--was PG-13, while The Birdcage was rated R. Curse words and the existence of gay people are, I guess, more harmful to young minds than images of bloody death. Whatev.

Clerks had to fight an NC-17 rating.

I stopped paying attention to movie ratings when I noticed that Jurassic Park--a movie with graphic violence and deaths--was PG-13, while The Birdcage was rated R. Curse words and the existence of gay people are, I guess, more harmful to young minds than images of bloody death. Whatev.
Well it is America. Death, unrealistically small amounts of blood, and extreme violence is a-ok. Anything that is counter to good Protestant ideals is bad.

Does anyone really bother consulting movie ratings? I know I don't...

Yeah of course. I got two kids, I need to know which films I can take them to, and whcih ones are suitible for just me and tha missus!:D

Does anyone really bother consulting movie ratings? I know I don't...
I don't consult them. Doesn't mean I still won't get mad seeing how full of shit they are.

Also, if you've ever spent any time on the message boards at IMDb, you'd have made the rather disquieting discovery of just how many people not only consult them but also ask questions like "I heard there is a graphic sex scene in [insert crappy Disneyesque movie where the only "sex scene" is a kiss and a fade to black]. I want to take my kids but if that's true, I won't. How bad is it really?"

You don't use a PG-13 rating as an indicator that a movie about a harsh subject has been wussified in order to gain wider release?

I just can't be bothered, much in the same way I can't be bothered researching who'll give me a better rate for my telephone from month-to-month.

After you are 21, ratings stop to matter anymore.

I'm old enough to not be bothered by ratings in the slightest, and I'm without kids. Huzzah!

I don't tend to pay attention, I go to this website where this guy with too much time on his hands lays out exactly what might be offensive about a movie before I take my kids though (if I don't get a chance to watch it myself before I take them) just so I have a heads up in case we have to discuss anything.

The MPAA decided to take into consideration smoking when deciding the rating for a movie. "Pervasive smoking" can lead to an R rating.

If we are going to make absurd things count in the ratings system, we should just make a new category - D, for pervasive drug use. If it also lives up to an R rating without the smoking, stick an R on the end. Now we have a ratings system that remotely lets people know what the fuck is wrong with the movie.

LS - Lezbeen sex - 15+
S - for sex - 18+
HS! - for 'teh Hott SEXX' -21+
JW (Just Wrong) - for the gay men kisses - 21+. Your name gets flashed on the billboard outside the cinema
OJN (O Jesus No!) - for the gay men butt secks - 21+. A picture of you is e-mailed to Gay Central for circulation to the others
SUB (Subtitled) - equivalent to S,HS!,JW and OJN - 21+. Time in public stocks outside cinema.

I stopped paying attention to movie ratings when I noticed that Jurassic Park--a movie with graphic violence and deaths--was PG-13, while The Birdcage was rated R. Curse words and the existence of gay people are, I guess, more harmful to young minds than images of bloody death. Whatev.

Gotta remember Birdcage painted gays in a good light and hypocritical conservatives in a bad one. I'm amazed it didn't get an NC-17 rating.

I"I heard there is a graphic sex scene in [insert crappy Disneyesque movie where the only "sex scene" is a kiss and a fade to black].

you mean....that's not what sex is? I have been seriously mislead

Gotta remember Birdcage painted gays in a good light and hypocritical conservatives in a bad one. I'm amazed it didn't get an NC-17 rating.

this is america we're talking about. I'm surprised it was allowed to air at all...

Clerks had to fight an NC-17 rating.

NC-17 don't have that here

The MPAA decided to take into consideration smoking when deciding the rating for a movie. "Pervasive smoking" can lead to an R rating.

If we are going to make absurd things count in the ratings system, we should just make a new category - D, for pervasive drug use. If it also lives up to an R rating without the smoking, stick an R on the end. Now we have a ratings system that remotely lets people know what the fuck is wrong with the movie.

How about additional ratings for:

Might offend Christians
Might offend Muslims
Might offend atheists
Not suitable for easily manipulated people
etc...

Finally read an article (http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/11/film.smoking.reut/index.html) on this, it could have been much worse.

Anti-tobacco activists have been pressing for an automatic R rating for films with smoking scenes, but MPAA chairman and CEO Dan Glickman rejected the proposal for a more nuanced approach.
...
"Some have called for a mandatory R rating on all films that contain any smoking," Glickman said. "We do not believe such a step would further the specific goal of providing information to parents on this issue. Unfortunately, the debate on this extreme proposal has become heavily politicized, and many inaccurate statements have been made. While those pushing this proposal are no doubt well-intentioned, it is important that there is an accurate understanding of the declining prevalence of smoking in non-R-rated films."
...
But not all the reaction was rosy.

American Legacy Foundation said the new MPAA ratings policy "falls short and fails to implement the meaningful recommendations set forth by numerous organizations." Washington-based ALF states its mission as being "dedicated to a world where young people reject tobacco and anyone can quit."

Hollywood has been under increasing pressure to take steps to ease the purported effect of entertainment content in several areas, from smoking to child obesity. Next week on Capitol Hill, the Senate Commerce Committee begins its examination of the effect violent content has on children.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-West Virginia, is expected to introduce legislation giving the FCC the power to regulate such content -- much as it does indecent content on television. In April, the FCC approved a report on TV violence that asked lawmakers for the requisite enforcement powers.

A Senate-FCC industry task force has been convened to identify ways of forcing content producers to encourage children to eat healthy foods.What they're doing is pretty mild-
"Clearly, smoking is increasingly an unacceptable behavior in our society," Glickman said. "There is broad awareness of smoking as a unique public health concern due to nicotine's highly addictive nature, and no parent wants their child to take up the habit. The appropriate response of the rating system is to give more information to parents on this issue."

Glickman described the move as an extension of the MPAA's practice of factoring underage smoking into the rating of films. The ratings board will ask three questions, he said:

- Is the smoking pervasive?

- Does the film glamorize smoking?

- Is there a historic or other mitigating context?

Also, when a film's rating is affected by the depiction of smoking, the rating will include such phrases as "glamorized smoking" or "pervasive smoking."

Under the circumstances, the MPAA is doing the best it can considering the pressure it's under to apparently raise people's kids for them.

Remembering the days of the Hayes Commision and it's near ludicrous restrictions, the artistic community sees this as a reasonable comprimise, knowing full well what can happen when the crackpots have their say (Marge vs. Itchy and Scratchy).



The Directors Guild of America was among several organizations issuing statements of support for the MPAA moves.

"The DGA supports the MPAA's announced enhancements to the ratings system and applauds their effort to provide parents with increased information on the depiction of smoking in movies," the guild said. "We appreciate that they, like us, are working to find the delicate balance between addressing important health concerns and safeguarding free expression."

The Screen Actors Guild also gave a statement of support.

"As advocates for both creative rights and child-protection legislation, we believe this is a reasonable approach to deal with a serious health issue," SAG deputy national executive director Pamm Fair said.

All things considered, this could have been much much worse. I have to agree with the DGA on this one.

Ratings system is pretty arbitrary anyway. See the film discussed here: http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=526225

LS - Lezbeen sex - 15+
S - for sex - 18+
HS! - for 'teh Hott SEXX' -21+
JW (Just Wrong) - for the gay men kisses - 21+. Your name gets flashed on the billboard outside the cinema
OJN (O Jesus No!) - for the gay men butt secks - 21+. A picture of you is e-mailed to Gay Central for circulation to the others
SUB (Subtitled) - equivalent to S,HS!,JW and OJN - 21+. Time in public stocks outside cinema.:p The last one cracked me up. :P

Finally read an article (http://www.cnn.com/2007/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/11/film.smoking.reut/index.html) on this, it could have been much worse.

What they're doing is pretty mild-

Under the circumstances, the MPAA is doing the best it can considering the pressure it's under to apparently raise people's kids for them.

Remembering the days of the Hayes Commision and it's near ludicrous restrictions, the artistic community sees this as a reasonable comprimise, knowing full well what can happen when the crackpots have their say (Marge vs. Itchy and Scratchy).





All things considered, this could have been much much worse. I have to agree with the DGA on this one.Ah, excellent, thanks for the article (boy was I ever too lazy to go look for one myself...).

Yeah, you're right. It's still pathetic that the issue is being pressed onto them in the first place and with such utterly infuriating sanctimoniousness, but apparently that's how things are these days in the New World.

:p The last one cracked me up. :P




Ty Sir.

I never cared about ratings in the first place.

I never cared about ratings in the first place.
As more people refuse to do their own parenting, it is only going to become more of something to not care about.

Ty Sir.Yw Madam.

I can see the use for ratings regarding the level of sex and violence. Anything else... Not so much, really.

This new idiocy has to do with the fucking nanny state telling people what to do in their private lives.

Ohhhh, you can't smoke!
Ohhhh, you can't eat fried foods!
Ohhhh, you can't express an opinion!
Ohhhh, you can't drink! (Remember how well THAT turned out.)

I'm sick and tired of the self-appointed arbiters of what is right and what the Baby Jesus would approve of telling us what to do.

If I want a rollicking case of lung cancer, that's MY business. Shut up about my smoking.

If I want to have heart disease, shut up about my KFC.

If I want to say that someone is a racist asshole, shut up about how he has the right to be one because he's been oppressed, but that I'm racist for thinking he's an asshole for saying the things he says.

If I want to use a incandescent bulb, I am NOT raping your grandmother on the altar of Gaia.

Can't everyone just get a life and leave everyone else alone?

Images of smoking IN NO WAY equates with images of people being raped, mangled, murdered, tortured, imprisoned, sexually abused, et cetera. So what the hell does it have to do with an R-rating?

this is america we're talking about. I'm surprised it was allowed to air at all...

It was on Broadway for quite some time, and you have to remember that a lot of theater and acting people are either gay or pro-gay simply because many of them share that lifestyle or know and work with people who do.

I think someone's orientation is no big deal -- if you don't like the idea of OMG gay secks, don't have it and mind your business.

Simple enough, eh?

If you don't like smoking, don't smoke.
If you don't like drinking, don't drink.
If you don't like rap music, don't listen to it.
If you don't like what some asshole says on the radio, change the fucking channel.

Yw Madam.

Though a 37 year old Irish male with the distended belly and hairy arse that denotes my race, I take that in the spirit it was meant....

Though a 37 year old Irish male with the distended belly and hairy arse that denotes my race, I take that in the spirit it was meant....Though a 33 year old German female with the distended boobs and non-hairy arse that denotes my race, that's how I took yours. :D

Ratings don't mean anything to me anyways, especially with PG's having drug use and/or references and the same for Sex.

Though a 33 year old German female with the distended boobs and non-hairy arse that denotes my race, that's how I took yours. :D

Screenies or I call BS!

Wouldn't it be better if we just skipped ratings? Who cares about them anyway? They're just stupid.

Movie ratings being foolish is hardly anything new those this smoking thing is really ridiculous. Of course when you can show a man's ass and be PG-13 but show the ass of a woman and you will most likely be stuck with an R rating, things are clearly troubled in movie rating land.

The MPAA decided to take into consideration smoking when deciding the rating for a movie. "Pervasive smoking" can lead to an R rating.

If we are going to make absurd things count in the ratings system, we should just make a new category - D, for pervasive drug use. If it also lives up to an R rating without the smoking, stick an R on the end. Now we have a ratings system that remotely lets people know what the fuck is wrong with the movie.

Lolz. What about the 50s period movies? Everybody in those smokes.

Lolz. What about the 50s period movies? Everybody in those smokes.


I was about to type something about sense probably prevailing, but thats just a stupid and momentary notion thats gone now......

And stop reading this thread. You're too young.

Lolz. What about the 50s period movies? Everybody in those smokes.

They're all rated ARRRRR

Does anyone really bother consulting movie ratings? I know I don't...
Schools. *nod*
You don't use a PG-13 rating as an indicator that a movie about a harsh subject has been wussified in order to gain wider release?

Like that movie about that babysitter and the call from inside the house?

Totally.

Schools. *nod*

yep...My School can't show anything over PG-13, even to my 12th grade class full of 17 and 18 year olds

yep...My School can't show anything over PG-13, even to my 12th grade class full of 17 and 18 year olds

If those 17 year olds were all 18, you could watch R movies. :)

If you haven't noticed, that's actually been happening. If you look at the ratings box they'll give short summary for why the film got its R or PG rating.

My favorite descriptors so far have been "Mild Peril" and "Some Dating"

I say before we make everywhere a non-smoking section or whatever, we make everywhere a non-asshattery section.

Movie ratings being foolish is hardly anything new those this smoking thing is really ridiculous. Of course when you can show a man's ass and be PG-13 but show the ass of a woman and you will most likely be stuck with an R rating, things are clearly troubled in movie rating land.

I thought they treated male nudity as worse then female nudity?

They're all rated ARRRRR

Idiots.

I thought they treated male nudity as worse then female nudity?

*scene from Borat fighting in hotel pops into head*

I was about to type something about sense probably prevailing, but thats just a stupid and momentary notion thats gone now......

And stop reading this thread. You're too young.

What can I say, I like some R-rated things.

If those 17 year olds were all 18, you could watch R movies. :)

Or if your teacher sends home a permission slip with a description of what's in the movie. *nod*

And an alternate assignment for those who don't feel comfortable participating.

Or if your teacher sends home a permission slip with a description of what's in the movie. *nod*

And an alternate assignment for those who don't feel comfortable participating.

I had no idea you could do that! Hmm..

*plots*

Or if your teacher sends home a permission slip with a description of what's in the movie. *nod*

And an alternate assignment for those who don't feel comfortable participating.

:D I once got excused from English class for a week because I didn't want to watch Braveheart, I told the teacher it was too violent.

In my film studies class last year (grade 10) we watched Fight Club, Americian Beauty and Boys in the Hood. It's fine as long as you don't have any kids in the class who are too immature (or who tell immature parents) and freakout about it.

The whole rating system is corrupted and is dictated by a small group of old and senile men. Blockbuster hits are pushed to have lower ratings while pressure is put on them to over-rate Indie films.

I pay little to no attention anymore. Hell, I have seen far worse things on my Internets than anything a movie has presented me.

I thought they treated male nudity as worse then female nudity?
You're thinking of the male wang, which flacid will send up flags and erect will never ever.
:p The last one cracked me up. :P

Ah, excellent, thanks for the article (boy was I ever too lazy to go look for one myself...).

Yeah, you're right. It's still pathetic that the issue is being pressed onto them in the first place and with such utterly infuriating sanctimoniousness, but apparently that's how things are these days in the New World.
Yay, someone reads my posts in film threads!
As more people refuse to do their own parenting, it is only going to become more of something to not care about.
But the reality is that it has gotten better.

Lets go back to the Hayes Code: (http://www.artsreformation.com/a001/hays-code.html)
II. Sex
The sanctity of the institution of marriage and the home shall be upheld. Pictures shall not infer that low forms of sex relationship are the accepted or common thing.

1. Adultery, sometimes necessary plot material, must not be explicitly treated, or justified, or presented attractively.

2. Scenes of Passion

a. They should not be introduced when not essential to the plot.

b. Excessive and lustful kissing, lustful embraces, suggestive postures and gestures, are not to be shown.

c. In general passion should so be treated that these scenes do not stimulate the lower and baser element.

3. Seduction or Rape

a. They should never be more than suggested, and only when essential for the plot, and even then never shown by explicit method.

b. They are never the proper subject for comedy.

4. Sex perversion or any inference to it is forbidden.

5. White slavery shall not be treated.

6. Miscegenation (sex relationships between the white and black races) is forbidden.

7. Sex hygiene and venereal diseases are not subjects for motion pictures.

8. Scenes of actual child birth, in fact or in silhouette, are never to be presented.

9. Children's sex organs are never to be exposed.

...

VIII. Religion
1. No film or episode may throw ridicule on any religious faith.

2. Ministers of religion in their character as ministers of religion should not be used as comic characters or as villains.

3. Ceremonies of any definite religion should be carefully and respectfully handled.

...

VII. Dances
Dancing in general is recognized as an art and as a beautiful form of expressing human emotions.

But dances which suggest or represent sexual actions, whether performed solo or with two or more; dances intended to excite the emotional reaction of an audience; dances with movement of the breasts, excessive body movements while the feet are stationary, violate decency and are wrong.



I invite you to read the whole thing. Remember that under the Hayes Code The Bicycle Theif (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040522/) was banned because a kid peed against a wall.

The Hayes Code came about not because the Motion Picture Association is uptight, but because the Catholic Decency League was actually editing films before release in certain states and it was the only way for the filmmakers to preserve their films (a court decision, that was later reveresed, had ruled that film was not protected speech and thus subject to censorship. We've come full circle on that as Bush sneaked in a proviso in a bill early in his presidency allowing DVD distributors to edit films for content without requiring them to tell the end user. The biggest offender in this regard is Blockbuster Video...if you saw it from Blockbuster you might not have seen the whole thing.

For clarification, there is this (http://www.cdfreaks.com/news/Congress-approves-Family-Movie-Act-to-allow-DVD-censorship.html), this (http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat061704.html), and this (http://newsnet.byu.edu/story.cfm/64125).

Actually it looks like my characterization was wrong, this bill changed the way it was done to disallow pre-editing but allow editing technology. Not how I remember it, but there it is.

The ratings, in reality, have gotten more permissive, not less. They have been unfairly and disproportionately assigned, arbitrary and shrouded in too much mystery, but even that has started to change. The rise of ratings like NC-17, which acknowledges that there are adult subjects beyond porn, and PG-13 which I will admit seems ridiculous but allowed that middle ground between 'questionable' and 'restricted.'

It's important to remember that the MPAA does this as a matter of self defense, and even with its pervasive rating system they're still about to be called before congress about content. The pressure is external, not internal. It's the people that flip out and start writing angry letters about a half a second of boob that are steering this ship.

Actually they get complaining before they see the thing. "Jerry Springer the Opera" being one example. Chris Morriss took the piss out of certain hysterical elements regarding child abuse on an episode of "Brass Eye". The complaints starting arriving before the program aired

I stopped paying attention to movie ratings when I noticed that Jurassic Park--a movie with graphic violence and deaths--was PG-13, while The Birdcage was rated R. Curse words and the existence of gay people are, I guess, more harmful to young minds than images of bloody death. Whatev.

I didn't notice the rating on the Birdcage - must have seen it after I was old enough to get in to R rated movies (and old enough not to give a rats ass...).

Now movie ratings can be completely ignored

They couldn't be before?? :confused:

*scene from Borat fighting in hotel pops into head*

I believe that had full frontal. Or was that Jackass? Both?

*can't remember*

Another big no-no apparently is showing female pleasure. If you spend too much time showing she enjoys it, your rating suffers.

LS - Lezbeen sex - 15+
S - for sex - 18+
HS! - for 'teh Hott SEXX' -21+
JW (Just Wrong) - for the gay men kisses - 21+. Your name gets flashed on the billboard outside the cinema
OJN (O Jesus No!) - for the gay men butt secks - 21+. A picture of you is e-mailed to Gay Central for circulation to the others
SUB (Subtitled) - equivalent to S,HS!,JW and OJN - 21+. Time in public stocks outside cinema.

Three questions:

1. Why is lesbian sex less inappropriate then normal sex and two guys KISSING?
2. Why is a man and a woman having sex less appropriate then two guys KISSING?
3. Why are two guys kissing and two guys having sex considered to be the same level of inappropriateness.

Therefore, from your post, I'm afraid I'm going to have to conclude that you're a bigot. (Don't say intolerant bigot! It's redundant!)

Three questions:

1. Why is lesbian sex less inappropriate then normal sex and two guys KISSING?
2. Why is a man and a woman having sex less appropriate then two guys KISSING?
3. Why are two guys kissing and two guys having sex considered to be the same level of inappropriateness.

Therefore, from your post, I'm afraid I'm going to have to conclude that you're a bigot. (Don't say intolerant bigot! It's redundant!)

His post looked like sarcasm but perhaps I missed something earlier....

Besides, if the world ran correctly, lesbian sex would be less of a problem then watching male/female intercourse. :D

They're all rated ARRRRR

The MPAA will not be pleased.

The MPAA will not be pleased.

Indeed, the Mutinous Pirate Association of America is a hard to please bunch.

If people were serious about the rating system, there would be stricter control, not just of movies, but video games too.

When I was 10, I was able to rent pg 13 video games. The store owner didn't even ask my age, even though some of the games were violent by more recent standards.

Here's an idea for a new ratings system.

There are four factors in the rating of a movie - violence, sex/nudity, language, and drugs. Each gets a number from, say, 0-5. For a better explanation, see below:
Violence: The more violence and blood, the higher the rating. Films with no violence (or maybe just the odd fistfight) get a 0. Many horror or war films get a 5. Action movies can reduce the ratings by minimizing blood.
Sex/nudity: Pretty simple. The more sex and nudity in the movie, the higher the rating. A 5 is a porn flick. Excessive innuendo can increase the rating.
Language: More swearing, higher the rating. Use less crude swear words to drop the rating.
Drugs: How common are drugs in the movie, and how are they portrayed? Under the new rules, glorification of tobacco bumps up this rating.

This system may be more complicated, but it helps. A religious organization (say, deciding what movie to show at a youth event) might pay more attention to the sex/nudity rating and less to the others.